Thailand's People's Protest Campaign Against the Corrupt Elite to Go On by Phairath Khampha 30 August 2000 Thailand's government and the Assembly of the Poor (AOP) wrote a new chapter in the development of participatory democracy on August 17, 2000 when they shared the stage at the country's first-ever public forum at Thammasat University. However, following the four-hour public forum, leaders of the Assembly of the Poor insisted on August 17, 2000 that their protests would continue until their problems were satisfactorily resolved. AOP leaders said they believed the government was determined to stick to its current methods of development, and resist the structural and legal changes required to resolve their problems and protect the rights of the public in the future. Thailand's current methods of development favour only the needs and aspirations of the country's economic and political elite and basically neglects those of Thailand's population escept where the two accidentally happen to coincide, which seems to be not often. In the end, if the elite have their way, there would not be any real democracy in Thailand, at least not for Thailand's majority. As an example of what Thailand's rich though about it all outside the hall it was a different story, as Thammasat students, mainly sons and daughters of Thailand's economic and political elite, seemed ignorant as to what was going on. "Why there are so many khon baan nok [country bumpkins] all over our university today," a male student asked his friends, as many poor villagers were seen roaming around the campus. When told that the villagers were from Isaan and were talking about what they had gone through as part and parcel of the so-called "development" process, another student said that it was just "too bad". Other students just laughed it off, as if their rural brothers' problems were not worth taking seriously. "I don't really know much about these matters," one of them admitted. "The rich against poor issue has been around for ages. I don't think it will pose any problems if each lives their own life without exploiting the other." But the fact is that same group of people do exploit the lives of Thailand's majority. "The protest must go on," said Wanida Tantiwittayapitak, an AOP adviser. Although no solutions were reached at the forum, many participants said they believed the forum was a success for at least allowing both sides to publicly air their views. More than 600 people were on hand at Thammasat University to watch the event as government officials and AOP representatives traded accusations, denials and suggestions concerning the impacts of development projects and other natural-resource management issues. The historic forum started with a debate on forestry issues. AOP representatives attacked a 1998 Cabinet resolution which has been used as a guideline for implementing forestry boundaries, claiming it is a major obstacle to solving the problems of villagers who have been long-term residents of land declared to be part of a conservation zone. They said the resolution grants absolute authority to the Royal Forestry Department to determine whether land is located in the forest. The said the resolution was drafted according to the same philosophy that led to the Khor Jor Kor land-allocation project for the poor, which ignited violence between forest dwellers and the government. Prime Minister's Office Minister Savit Bhotiwihok defended the government's position, saying all public development projects were the result of democratic processes. This, of course, is quite untrue in Thailand because if any one member of the public effectively carries out any action against a decreed action, he or she is often dealt with through intimidation and even physical force if he or she does not cease and desist in his or her actions. "Development projects are approved by the National Economic and Social Development Board. And [the government] was elected by the people," Savit said. He neglected to say that most legislators were elected through a fraudulent electoral process. AOP representatives recounted the long history of forest dwellers' problems, claiming they were all the result of the government's unjust policies. They said the government convinced villagers to live in the forest during the Cold War years to serve as a buffer against the spread of communism. It was not the villagers who encroached upon the forest themselves. The government representatives insisted they were willing to solve the problems in accordance with the law. RFD director-general Plodprasop Suraswadi said the Cabinet resolution in question had served as a fair tool for solving the problems. He said the forest and its resources belonged to all the country's 60 million people, so the RFD must be fair to everyone. Deputy Interior Minister Wattana Asavahem read from a prepared statement, saying the villagers had the government's sympathy. Most of the AOP members laughed hollowly and sarcastically at this inane statement. The two sides fiercely debated the dam issues. The AOP team claimed all of the villagers' problems were caused by the government, and gave accounts of how families suffered as a result of the projects. Phakdee Janthajiead said his father lost about 100 rai of land due to the construction of the Sirindhorn Dam, and was not compensated for any of it. Phakdee said his parents became destitute afterward, and therefore he lost the opportunity to gain an education. Meanwhile, the government criticised the villagers' demands. Minister Anurak Jureemas accused the suffering of Pet Khanchandra, who also recounted her family's problems, was caused by her mother, who refused to participate in verifying the boundary of her land during the construction of the Huay La Haa Dam. However, Wanida showed that Hai, Pet's mother, had not refused to participate and only had problems because her land had already been submerged by the reservoir's water and the official in charge refused to include submerged land. "How then could the government demarcate her land?" Wanida said. Savit, who is also in charge of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT), said more studies were needed before it is decided whether the fish ladder at Pak Mun Dam should be destroyed. He insisted construction of the dam was not a mistake, as villagers have claimed and subsequent reports prepared by international engineering consultants have indicated. The neutral committee established by the government to address the villagers' demands seized the opportunity to propose more solutions. Chairman Banthon Orndam said the government should acknowledge that some laws must be amended to solve the problems. He said the laws ucrrently protect the rights and interests of the country's elite and ignores those of ordinary Thais. Committee member Yont Musik proposed that the committee be given the task of hiring those who conduct environmental-impact studies, rather than the projects' developers. "This way we will have the right information and it will lead to the right decision because it will be more impartial," he said. "Most consultants are companies that are owned by the same people who have interests in having a project go ahead. How can that be impartial?" Yont also called on the public to help set new rules and standards for natural-resource management. Deputy Agriculture Minister Newin Chidchob refused to accept the AOP's proposal to redistribute land owned by the rich to the poor. He said a progressive land tax should bring about better land distribution. "We can't violate the rights of those who are good citizens by seizing their land to distribute to the poor," he said. He refused to acknowledge the fact that it was true that the rich, however, went about seizing the land of the poor to distribute among the rich through usurious loans of as much as 25% per month compounded monthly, and using the politicians for whom they paid to have elected make laws that favoured such actions. Commenting on whether the forum was successful, social activist Prof Prawes Wasi said it is simply good that both sides decided to sit and talk instead of confronting each other as in the past. "It is okay even though a solution has yet to be reached, because the issues are structural problems. Our society lacks the skills and perhaps even the will to solve these structural conflicts," he said. PollWatch president Gen Saiyood Kirdphol agreed with Prawes, saying the forum was a good first step toward peacefully resolving the conflict. Forum moderator Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said the forum was an effective mechanism for solving such structural conflicts. "The result is positive. I believe that it will lead to a proper solution in the long run," he said. Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai said his only request prior to the forum was that everyone speak the truth. He again asked the protesters to return home, saying their presence [in front of Government House] would not affect his decision on the issues. "If we can help resolve three of the five demands, the people should understand that it's all we can do," Chuan said. Law first and generous later. Comments made by members of the economic and political elite attending the forum: Savit Bhodiwihok, Prime Minister Office's Minister in charge of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) said: "more studies are needed for further measures whether should we destroy the fish ladder at Pak Mun Dam, but I insisted the dam is not a mistake." Banthorn Ondam, president of the neutral committee for the poor's problems commented that law does not provide sufficient justice, this must be reviewed. And its implementation is lack of public participation, he said. Prapas Pintoptaeng, a neutral committee's member said: "We must realise to learning process of the grassroots people. The situation has changed like the knowledge in the society, so, the solution for the social problem must be included in these changes." Royal Forestry Department's director general Plodprasop Suraswadi and deputy Agriculture Minister Newin Chidchob represented the government. Laothai Nilnuan, Prayong Doklamyai and Nuntachote Chairat represented the AOP, however Phakdee Janthajiead, Petch Khanjantra and Wanida, as representatives of the AOP, had a face-off with Pornthep Tejapaibul, deputy Science Minister, Anurak Jurimas, deputy Agriculture Minister and PM Office Minister Sawit. Two-hundred and two questions were submitted to the referee to have them answered by the panellists but there was a time limit and only 20 questions were asked at the forum. Other questions that had not been read at the public forum included: "Why do ministers seem not to be listening when villagers speak?" "[Minister] Savit sounds as if villagers have a price tag … if the villagers will end up starving to death, what are you going to do then?" Wanida urged the public to understand that the AOP is working to preserve the natural resources that belong not to just this generation but the posterity. She also said the matter is about justice and not charitable work. Public Utterances Many memorable words were exchanged at Thailand's first public forum. Here are some of them: On the public forum: Today is a historical day … We hear what we do not know, we see what we have not seen. Eatana Asawahame, Deputy Interior Minister, on the government's behaviour: It is against the new Constitution. It's a violation of community rights, villagers' rights. Prapas Pinttaeng, Member of the Neutral Committee, on how problems can be solved: The law must be changed. Banthorn Orn-Dam, Chairman of the Neutral Committee: I sympathise with the villagers and am willing to help solve their problems. But it must begin with the law and end with compassion. Plodprasop Suraswadi, Director-General of the Royal Forestry Department, on the accuracy of aerial pictures: The aerial picture is very clear. A plough can be seen; we can even tell if glasses are 'Ray-Bans' or not. And on the land problem in the North: Ninety per cent of the encroachers in the North have no land title. They have no identification cards. And therefore they are not Thais and have no rights. Newin Chitchob, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Cooperative, on land titles: [Poor] villagers ask for land titles but they never receive them. Those with money, however, can have land titles anywhere they wish, even inside a national park. Chaipan Prapasawat, Assembly of the Poor Advisor, on Pak Mun Dam's fish ladder: We must redesign it or dismantle it if it's of no use. Sawit Bhotiwihok, Prime Minister's Office Minister: Who oversees the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, which built the Pak Mun Dam ? How many more years will it take for the government to study [the effectiveness of the fish ladder]? And what will the villagers eat? Wanida Tantiwittayapitak, Assembly of the Poor Advisor, on the people's demands: What the villagers are asking for is very little. They're asking for a livelihood, for the benefit of their children and their future, and for their broken communities. Have we fairly compensated them so far? … This is not about charity work - it's about justice. And on how Sirindhorn Dam affected him: At the end I had to sell my labour although I didn't want to. Who said [development] would make life better? … Let the tears of the Sirindhorn Dam [victims] be the last. Pakdee Chajiek, Former Resident, on Pak Mun Dam: The dam can only produce 40 to 50 megawatts of electricity, but it has such a vastly destructive power. Srisakara Wallibhotamata, Member of the Neutral Committee, on whether NGOs are making money at the expense of the poor: I must be stupid if I am making a living out of the poor. I should make a living out of ministers instead. Chaipan Prapasawat, on the future: We must help each other think about what to do next. At this point we must really try to seek a mutual solution.